return to WCA Archive Index
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
RE: "How To" Demonize Waldorf
By pkcompany netzero.net
RE: "State schools 'could learn from Steiner principles' "
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
RE: oh my, what on earth is going on here
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
RE: "State schools 'could learn from Steiner principles' "
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
RE: oh my, what on earth is going on here
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
Re: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
RE: oh my, what on earth is going on here
By g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se
RE: THE STRANGEST VILLAGE IN BRITAIN
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
RE: Amateur Conspiracy Hounds are at it again
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
About the latest on the lawsuit
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By pkcompany netzero.net
RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By dan dandugan.com
RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
"Pie-in-the-sky do-gooders..."
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
"The signs are good."
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
"...happy to work endlessly..."
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
RE: "How To" Demonize Waldorf
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
"Steiner Schools in England" Report
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
Re: oh my, what on earth is going on here
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 13:16:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
) --- Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com) wrote:
)
) ) Linda, the claim you make in your last statement
) is
) ) wrong. Neither Dan nor anyone else asked me if he
) ) could publish my family's Waldorf horror story.
) It
) ) should not really matter whether or not Dan
) solicits
) ) articles but it's another example of your and
) ) Serena's
) ) making false claims based on speculation.
Linda wrote:
) My apologies.
Thank you.
) It is unfair of you to include Serena
) for blame in this.
I did not blame Serena for your claim. I said that
your claim was an example of something that both you
and Serena do. Nothing "unfair" about that.
) "It shouldn't really matter" is an odd statement,
) because walden has made an issue of it.
As far as I can remember, Walden raised the issue of
survivors but you are the one who raised the issue of
how "articles" get onto the PLANS Web site. Please
correct me if I'm wrong.
) PLANS has selected certain WC list posts for
) publication as articles at their website, and asked
) permission of the authors. I apologize for
) incorrectly including yours to be one of them.
) )
) ) Considering the spurious arguments you and Serena
) ) came
) ) up with in your futile attempts to prove that
) ) Steiner
) ) didn't say something he said - all so that Serena
) ) wouldn't have to admit she was wrong - I am
) ) anticipating that you will refuse to admit that
) you
) ) were wrong when you made your statement quoted at
) ) the
) ) top of this post.
Thank you for proving me wrong!
) I'm also sorry that you've completely missed the
) point
) of this issue you're referring to. Steiner did not
) say that humans can become reincarnated into gnomes.
Steiner taught that nature spirits are gnomes, sylphs,
undines and salamanders. Here's the Steiner quote
Diana provided:
"In fact the human race will furnish a whole number of
such new nature spirits in the second half of the
Jupiter evolution, for man will have completed his
fifth principle at the Jupiter stage. For those who
have not used the opportunity on earth to develop the
fifth principle, there will be no available form. They
will appear as nature spirits, and they will appear
then with four principles, the fourth being the
highest. Whereas the normally advanced man will
have the principles 5,4,3,2 at the Jupiter stage,
these people will have 4,3,2,1."
) I believe you are allowing Diana's conjecture to
) overshadow Steiner's own statements.
No, as far as I can tell it was not conjecture on
Diana's part. And no, I read the quote for myself and
it isn't difficult to understand.
Diana's
) analysis
) of this particular lecture (which she has told us
) she
) sent to someone else years ago, thus I conclude she
) must no longer have it in order to refresh memory)
) has
) been almost completely wrong.
Ever since Serena accused Diana of being wrong and
Diana provided the Steiner quotation to prove she was
right, you and Serena have provided a frantic flurry
of spurious arguments - the term "nature spirit" is
not synonymous with "gnome" (duh!), it's going to
happen a long time in the future, etc. I address this
to Serena: it won't kill you to admit that you were
wrong. Being truthful is always the best path.
Best wishes,
Margaret
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 20:32:43 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: "How To" Demonize Waldorf
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
)
) Serena- aol.com wrote:
)
) You say "If I wanted to demonize Waldorf, I wouldn't bother thinking
) up these analogies that have you so peeved, I'd just do it directly."
)
) Wow, I hate to think what you would come up with if you decided
) to demonize WE directly instead of merely linking it to David Koresh'
) death cult and Guantanamo Bay!
Well, for one thing, these are analogies and not direct experiences. I
could bring up direct experiences at Waldorf that are absolutely factual
and, not surprisingly, horrible. Would you like to hear some of my
direct experiences involving dishonesty, control, sexual abuse, verbal
abuse, emotional torment, lying to children, asking children to lie,
lying to parents, asking parents to lie, teaching stuff that isn't true
or isn't accurate, interference in legal matters, child endangerment,
exposure of children to inappropriate materials, distributing pills to
children without parental consent, covering up all of the above. And
that's just off the top of my head. People can take or leave references
to Koresh with a grain of salt, but when people like me make claims that
these detailed and verifiable events happened, this carries far more
weight and is far more damaging to Waldorf than some off-handed comment.
)
) O dear...something I said caused you to respond and link WE
) with concentration camps, David Koresh' death cult and now
) Guantanamo Bay?
)
) Soooo, I made you do it? It's maybe all my fault? Whew!
I can't speak for anyone else, but I like to use these types of
analogies because they annoy you so much. I confess. So, maybe it IS
your fault to some degree...
) Wonder what I said that would have caused you and Pete to
) demonize WE by associating it with:
)
) torture and degradation, starvation, gassing
) annihilation of whole populations
) fanatic death cults, child sexual abuse
) sexual degradation, abuse and torture
) imprisonment and torture and death
) human rights violations
) spiritual "torture" and humiliation
Some of the things you mention above actually happen in Waldorf schools
- some frequently - funny you should mention them.
)
) Maybe it was about the loving relationships I experienced in
) Camphill...or my concern about the right of people with learning
) disabilities to choose where they live...or that I objected to being
) called potty-mouth names...I'd better think deeply about this!
)
Having heard stories about Camphill from a family member who worked
there (Aberdeen, Scotland), I can relate that the picture they painted
was not at all about loving relationships, but more about control, abuse
and human rights violations. Sorry, Serena, your story doesn't wash.
Pete
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 20:47:19 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: "State schools 'could learn from Steiner principles' "
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,5500,1517494,00.html?gusrc=rss
)
)
) State schools 'could learn from Steiner principles'
)
) Polly Curtis, education correspondent
) Thursday June 30, 2005
)
) Ministers should consider adopting Steiner school principles of
) putting pupils' spiritual and social awareness ahead of test
) results, a government-backed study recommended today.
I've just read the report's recommendations; the above is not there. The
nearest it gets is this:
) Recommendation 9: Government and LEAs to ensure that they, and
) agencies such as Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted) and
) Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), are informed by a
) developed understanding and appreciation, in the full context of
) Steiner education, of how Steiner schools assess progress and
) facilitate pupils' learning and of other distinctive aspects of
) Steiner schools (Recommendations 12 and 18); this to be developed
) internally, through opportunities for elected representatives and
) officials concerned with Steiner education to build up such
) understanding and appreciation, and/or facilitated though external
) advisors.
)
) Recommendation 10: Government and L[ocal Education Authorities] to
) support the development and acceptance of alternative ways by which
) pupils leaving Steiner schools can demonstrate capability for
) further study and employment, building on current practice.
) Recommendation 11: Government and LEAs, in co-operation with the
) S[teiner Waldorf Schools' Fellowship], to develop appropriate ways
) of identifying and comparing Steiner schools' educational outcomes.
The Guardian report also says that Montessori education is about to be
introduced in one state primary school: despite 'working with the
Steiner fellowship of schools since 2001 to discuss how the schools
could be introduced into the state system', Waldorf education receives
no state funding.
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/4633601.stm
) The report, based on talking to 21 of the schools, calls for them to
) co-operate with the state sector.
This is more accurate: the BBC story points out that the report is about
how dialogue between Steiner and mainstream education ought to proceed
if the former wants state funding. I don't see these recommendations
going down too well:
) Recommendation 14: Steiner schools to ensure that professional
) development enables teachers and other relevant staff to become
) better acquainted with developments in theory, research, policies
) and practices in mainstream education and be prepared to review
) Steiner educational theories and practices in light of this.
)
) Recommendation 21: Steiner schools to identify in what ways
) leadership and management arrangements and the skills and
) capabilities available in schools need to be improved in order to
) develop and sustain a continuing capacity for change, and to devise
) a strategy for bringing about these improvements.
)
) Recommendation 22: Steiner schools to give attention to what changes
) might be needed in their leadership and management arrangements and
) the skills and capabilities available in schools in order to forge
) and sustain new multiple external relationships and partnerships.
)
) Recommendation 23: Steiner schools to review, with an input from
) representatives of the maintained sector, where and how record
) keeping and accountability procedures would need to be improved.
In a thorough review of the research literature, Steiner's racist ideas
and Waldorf's reliance on 'Goethean' pseudoscience are briefly
mentioned: a footnote mentions waldorfcritics.org
Two of the literature review's findings:
) The research studies reviewed give a cumulative sense of a positive
) relationship between Steiner schools and learning, achievement and
) pupils' development of academic, creative, social and other
) capabilities important in the holistic growth of the person. The
) research evidence has to be interpreted with caution, however.
) Studies are often small scale and conducted in different cultural
) and national contexts that may affect the confidence with which
) findings can be generalised to other settings. Overall, there is a
) lack of rigorous research on the impact of Steiner school education
) on learning and achievement and little research which systematically
) compares Steiner and mainstream schools.
)
) The research studies reviewed also give a cumulative impression that
) Steiner schools tend to create positive and mutually supportive
) relationships in schools. However, as with the research on learning
) and achievement, studies tend to be small scale and there are
) insufficient rigorous comparative investigations of Steiner and
) mainstream schools. More research into Steiner schools in different
) contexts, and in comparison with community-orientated mainstream
) schools, is required to investigate further to what extent mutually
) supportive and caring relationships are a distinctive feature of
) Steiner education and explore how this comes about.
A link to the report: it's not yet on dfes.gov.uk so far as I can tell.
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Education/documents/2005/06/30/Steiner.pdf
University of the West of England links:
http://edu.uwe.ac.uk/cred/research/projects/steiner2.asp
http://edu.uwe.ac.uk/cred/research/projects/steiner.asp
The last one's for a study, underway now, that will be released next
year.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 21:39:54 +0000
From: L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: oh my, what on earth is going on here
amy hatch wrote:
)
)
) as a newcomer that no has even acknowledged, I have read some old posts
) and
) all the news ones since yesterday.
I'm sorry, amy. I didn't speak up because you asked about your school
specifically, and I know nothing about it. I'm sorry you felt ignored.
You are going about this the right way~~you need to look carefully at
the school you're considering, because they're not all the same. My
children's school has been wonderful, but you really need to look at
each one carefully, as well as be clear in your own mind what your
priorities are for your children's education.
Linda
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 21:49:18 +0000
From: L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: "State schools 'could learn from Steiner principles' "
That's great news. Thanks, Serena.
Linda
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
) http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,5500,1517494,00.html?gusrc=rss
)
)
) State schools 'could learn from Steiner principles'
)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 21:57:59 +0000
From: L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: oh my, what on earth is going on here
walden wrote:
)
) Hi Amy,
) I must say, however, the last line of your recent post does not sound
) particularly friendly. There is much to discuss and learn - if one
) chooses
) to do so.
)
~groan~
That's a helluva welcome, walden.
I'd say there's a whole lot of "discussing" on this board, but not much
happens in the way of "learning".
Linda
Linda
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 17:59:48 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
Margaret wrote:
Steiner taught that nature spirits are gnomes, sylphs,
undines and salamanders. Here's the Steiner quote
Diana provided:
"In fact the human race will furnish a whole number of
such new nature spirits in the second half of the
Jupiter evolution, for man will have completed his
fifth principle at the Jupiter stage. For those who
have not used the opportunity on earth to develop the
fifth principle, there will be no available form. They
will appear as nature spirits, and they will appear
then with four principles, the fourth being the
highest. Whereas the normally advanced man will
have the principles 5,4,3,2 at the Jupiter stage,
these people will have 4,3,2,1."
Linda:
I believe you are allowing Diana's conjecture to
overshadow Steiner's own statements.
Margaret:
No, as far as I can tell it was not conjecture on
Diana's part. And no, I read the quote for myself and
it isn't difficult to understand.
Diana's
analysis
of this particular lecture (which she has told us
she
sent to someone else years ago, thus I conclude she
must no longer have it in order to refresh memory)
has
been almost completely wrong.
Margaret:
Ever since Serena accused Diana of being wrong and
Diana provided the Steiner quotation to prove she was
right, you and Serena have provided a frantic flurry
of spurious arguments - the term "nature spirit" is
not synonymous with "gnome" (duh!), it's going to
happen a long time in the future, etc. I address this
to Serena: it won't kill you to admit that you were
wrong. Being truthful is always the best path.
Best wishes,
Margaret
==============================
But RS didn't say that the stuck human beings would
come back as a bodiless nature spirit like a gnome or
undine, sylph or salamander. He said they would stay
at the same human level -- not progress -- & keep their
bodily form and so would be regarded as a NEW type of
nature spirit.
The careless part of what Diana said was to give the reporter
the impression that A's think people would incarnate into these
gnomes, with the implication that they resemble the little
figures that abound in WE classrooms.
The numbers RS uses makes this very clear: the unprogressed
retain their bodily form (4,3,2,1) and the progressed attain a
new form but leave the body behind (5,4,3,2)
You quote this yourself. It's perplexing how you can quote
it but not see it right in front of your eyes.
According to RS:
1. Does the unprogressed human have a body? Yes
2. Does the progressed person have a body? No
3. Do gnomes, sylphs, undines & salamanders have human
bodies? No
4. Is therefore the unprogressed person with a human body
a gnome? (or other old nature spirit like an undine, sylph,
salamander) No
5. Is the progressed person without a body now a nature spirit
or old nature spirit (gnome, undine, sylph, salamander)? No
6. Is therefore the unprogressed person, still with a human body,
but left behind in development, is a NEW nature spirit with a
physical form? Yes
I believe these are true inasmuch as they reflect what RS says
in the quote above. Which of these do you believe is false, Margaret?
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 22:00:15 +0000
From: Why Not (g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se)
Subject: RE: oh my, what on earth is going on here
Amy,
I am a parent of waldorf students, as well as waldorf trained. I and my
wife are interested and work with Rudolf Steiners work.
I have been trying to get a fix on the purpose of this list for three
months now. Apparently there are two factions here fighting each other,
like politics. The republicans call the democrats extremists and vice
versa. Anthroposophy is a huge subject and a life calling for some of
us. We are university trained and live in the real world as well as work
with waldorf in a more private sphere. We are well aware of the hate
that the accepted university models have for anthroposophy and anything
related to anthroposophy. There are thankfully some wonderful
dissertations coming out that explore the huge gap between accepted
paradigms and anthroposophy. None of us working in anthro see any
acceptance of Steiner in the “real” world but instead a kind of ignorant
ridicule. Mostly we just shrug our shoulders.
Anyways my school faculty has been interested in the spirit of this WC
list and it has fallen upon me to give them my opinion of the benefit
this group has, what insights the participants have and if our school
can use them to be stronger and deeper. My opinion is my own but I share
your shock at the level of manipulation and shock discussion that goes
on in this group. Winning intellectual points appears to be the point of
this list- she is self perpetuating and has a life of her own, living
off the energy trapped in the list. I realize that most preach to their
choir here and that going across the isle is not advisable but
ironically I am in the middle of these two groups, neither beholden to
waldorf nor her critics. I have problems with both sides. I have found
however that certain personalities have a more vocal presence than
others. Any of this sound like anthroposophy?
I suppose that may be a reason wonder why our foreign members aren’t
more active.
Gabriel
amy hatch wrote:
)
)
) as a newcomer that no has even acknowledged, I have read some old posts
) and
) all the news ones since yesterday.
)
) I am not an anthroposophist, I don't believe Steiner was correct about
) much
) of anything (no offense intended, but this is what io believe). I also
) agree
) that our Steiner school does not do enough to explain Syeiner,
) anthroposophy, or their direct influence on and within the school.
)
) however, I don't think I could possibly ever argue in the way that many
) of
) you do. so many are just rude, snippy, and just plain not polite. there
) can
) certainly be debate and explanation with resorting to sarcasm and petty
) between-the-lines namecalling.
)
) I'll stick around a little longer to see if anyone has any of the info I
) was
) looking for in my 1st post, but after that I will bid this place
) farewell.
)
) cheers,
)
) amy
)
) --
) No virus found in this outgoing message.
) Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
) Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.6/33 - Release Date: 6/28/2005
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 22:01:46 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: THE STRANGEST VILLAGE IN BRITAIN
Radio Times letter of the week (2-8 July 2005, p. 8).
) Despite the insulting title, I watched 'The Strangest Village in
) Britain'(16 June C[hannel] 4) in the unrealised hope that it would
) be responsible rather than gratuitous; that it would raise awareness
) of the problems faced by people with learning difficulties.
)
) The people featured could not possibly have given informed consent
) to be in a programme that cruelly showed them at their frustrated
) worst. One of them, Pamela, expressed her pain at being disliked.
) this invasion of her privacy gave her the chance to feel she may be
) disliked by millions.
)
) I wish I had the power to install cameras in the homes of those
) responsible, and broadcast the edited reults to the nation.
There's another letter on the same subject:
) Having visited Botton a few weeks ago, I was looking forward to 'The
) Strangest Village in Britain', and had encouraged many others to
) tune in. How I wish I hadn't!
)
) Instead of showing the joy and harmony of life there, the programme
) focused on one argument happening in one workshop. discord happens
) in every workplace at times; surely there were more stories like the
) one of the young woman liberted to walka mile to work each day,
) simply because those around her dealt with her fear of slipping with
) dignity, respect and compassion?
) My visit remains a wonderful day; my prayer is that this programme
) has not done any harm to those involved.
It's hard to believe this guy has seen the same programme: it featured
not just discord, but violence. Katie, who was terrified of falling on
the ice during her daily walk to work, far from being dealt with
compassionately, was treated by her 'house-mother' like an irritating
attention-seeker. Botton's 'co-workers' are as responsible as the
film-makers for any harm done.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 22:32:43 +0000
From: L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Amateur Conspiracy Hounds are at it again
walden wrote:
)
) Linda wrote:
) )You wanted me to discuss the "hundreds who apply" to the WSO for some
) )reason. Are you unwilling to discuss them yourself?
)
) You seem to try very hard not to understand some things, Linda. NO - I
) am
) not willing to discuss the members of a private, confidential support
) list.
) No. This should not be a surprise. I DID NOT ask you discuss the members
) of
) a private list - especially one you do not belong to. I asked about
) your
) thoughts on the REASON for such a list.
Round and round he goes.
I gave you my thoughts on the nature of the list. The reason it exists,
I believe, is to provide a place for you and others who are selected to
share complaints about their school privately.
This list, the *reason* for this list, and the number of people who
*apply* for this list have no impact whatsoever on why companies like
google would have been getting complaints about PLANS advertising. The
list, the reason for the list, and the number of people who apply for
the list, would have no bearing whatsoever on why companies like google
would refuse to accept PLANS advertising.
The reason PLANS advertising was rejected was because of the content in
its website.
)
) Linda wrote:
) "Hundreds who apply" are who, walden? Why did you refer to them? Who are
) they? Where did they come from? What do they have to say? What do they
) represent? How do you know?
)
) Obfuscation. Why not answer the question put to you about the *reason*
) for
) such a support list?
)
) Fact: There is a support list for Survivors of Waldorf/Anthro. Current
) membership is listed at 102. Members arrive, stay for a while, some stay
) longer and some leave when ready to leave. The list has been around for
) a
) few years. It is a private list and I am not willing to discuss "who
) they
) are" on a public list. That would be unethical and I find it hard to
) believe
) you would expect such a discussion here.
)
It wouldn't be unethical to explain to me how you came to claim
"hundreds" have applied to it. Because at this point, I strongly
believe you made it up, that you became carried away for a second by the
sound of your own self-righteousness.
) One more time: There is a reason for this Waldorf Critics list, other
) email
) lists (including WSO), a controversy involving
) more than a few people and presentations at cult/NRM (new religious
) movement) conferences, etc. There is a reason.
)
Now you're tap dancing your way to the subject of cult conferences?
The cult conferences, the WSO, and this critics list are NOT the reason
the PLANS advertising was rejected. The reason the advertising was
rejected is because of the content published at the PLANS website. You
can show up with a top hat, cane, the kitchen sink, and every other
irrelevant diversion you can come up with to try and sidestep the point,
walden. Knock yourself out...it won't change the facts.
Linda
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 17:16:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linda Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
--- Diana Winters (Diana.Winters verizon.net) wrote:
)
) )Diana's article, which she already admitted was
) solicited,
)
) "Admitted"? Huh? I'm supposed to be ashamed of my
) (sort of) article being
) there?
) (Guess what? I have another one coming, based on my
) talk at AFF. I suppose
) it was "solicited" also, in that I wrote it, and
) Dan, after hearing it,
) asked if he could put it on the web site. Pretty
) suspicious don't you think?
Not really. Walden just doesn't like the way it
sounds, and has insisted that I "back it up".
I've already "backed it up" several times, but he
refuses to admit it. I appreciate that you stepped in
to give it a go this time.
)
) )went up the same day, the same way.
)
) Wow! It went up the same day! My God, do you do
) anything else but monitor
) the activities of Waldorf critics? How come you know
) what I said or didn't
) say FOUR YEARS AGO, and you know WHAT DAY my article
) went on the PLANS web
) site?
PLANS has indicated the date it was first published on
the website, printing it right next to the link,
Diana. It's not a secret.
) *I* don't keep track of my notable utterances
) as closely as you do,
) lady!
Another "lady"? "Lady", you should remember that next
time you overreact and complain, "Are you calling me a
liar?", and insist you didn't say something that you
completely forgot saying. At least *double-check* it
for yourself before accusing me of making it up. Just
a suggestion, which I've offered before.
) Do you write all this in your diary?
No. I pay attention, I remember, and I double-check
myself regularly.
)
) )These articles were published to coincide with a
) completely planned event.
)
) A "completely planned event"? The date of a web site
) update? Whew . . . I
) think you just need some excitement in your life,
) Linda.
I pay attention, I remember, and I double-check myself
regularly.
This was a VERY planned event. Not just the
publication of your article--it was but one piece of
the 'surprise'. Gary Bonhiver gave at least two
advance tease notices, a week or so appart, on the SJU
list a few weeks before the updated website was
"unveiled". These were very bizarre notices about the
upcoming event, btw, containing lengthy passages about
the Winter Solstice.
Gary also solicited articles from the WC list, and
Debra made the announcement here when the Big Day
arrived. Nobody paid her any attention, so the next
day she announced it again.
You were here. So was walden. Good times, good
times.
Linda
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 00:54:35 +0000
From: L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: About the latest on the lawsuit
Waldorfanswers has a copy of a press release regarding the latest
development in the case.
According to this press release, PLANS has been denied 11 of its
witnesses and 101 pieces of evidence because of failure to make timely
disclosure to the defendant.
It also states that PLANS has *no* expert witnesses lined up?
It seems PLANS is already off to a wobbly start.
http://www.waldorfanswers.org/CourtOrder20April2005PressInfo.html
Any comment?
Linda
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 02:29:07 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) According to RS:
)
) 1. Does the unprogressed human have a body? Yes
)
) 2. Does the progressed person have a body? No
)
) 3. Do gnomes, sylphs, undines & salamanders have human
) bodies? No
)
) 4. Is therefore the unprogressed person with a human body
) a gnome? (or other old nature spirit like an undine, sylph,
) salamander) No
)
) 5. Is the progressed person without a body now a nature spirit
) or old nature spirit (gnome, undine, sylph, salamander)? No
)
) 6. Is therefore the unprogressed person, still with a human body,
) but left behind in development, is a NEW nature spirit with a
) physical form? Yes
)
) I believe these are true inasmuch as they reflect what RS says
) in the quote above. Which of these do you believe is false, Margaret?
I'd like to answer that one - THEY'RE ALL FALSE. Where is the evidence
that any of these things are anything but false - the imaginings of
Steiner? Geez...
Pete
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 18:07:01 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
DAN DUGAN:
) ) Regarding Altavista (Overture), Sune is incorrect. They accept our
)) ads. We have the service turned off right now simply because we can't
)) afford it.
)LINDA CLEMENS:
)According to Waldorf answers, altavista rejected PLANS ads. Altavista
)will not accept overture ads which they've determine violate their own
)ad policies.
I repeat, WaldorfAnswers is incorrect on that point. It would enhance
their credibility if they removed that false statement.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:39:05 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
Serena- aol.com wrote:
According to RS:
1. Does the unprogressed human have a body? Yes
2. Does the progressed person have a body? No
3. Do gnomes, sylphs, undines & salamanders have human
bodies? No
4. Is therefore the unprogressed person with a human body
a gnome? (or other old nature spirit like an undine, sylph,
salamander) No
5. Is the progressed person without a body now a nature spirit
or old nature spirit (gnome, undine, sylph, salamander)? No
6. Is therefore the unprogressed person, still with a human body,
but left behind in development, is a NEW nature spirit with a
physical form? Yes
I believe these are true inasmuch as they reflect what RS says
in the quote above. Which of these do you believe is false, Margaret?
I'd like to answer that one - THEY'RE ALL FALSE. Where is the evidence
that any of these things are anything but false - the imaginings of
Steiner? Geez...
Pete
=================================
Fudging the question, are you, Pete?
It wasn't for you anyway. Besides, nothing here you could tie to a
concentration camp, or brainwashing. How boring for you. But wait
a sec -- *you* can tie *everything* to lies and brainwashing! How
simple it all its.
Next thing you'll be writing about rounding up "evil doers"...
There's no evidence in your mind that RS said anything meaningful.
However, there's no evidence that your potpouri of spiritual musings
mean anything either. If you want to see it like that, of course.
I'd like Margaret and Diana to take a shot at these questions. You
won't because unless you want to be shown up as a transparent
_ _ _ _, you have to agree that I got the substance of the matter
correct (apologies to the finer souls among us -- you know why).
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:55:22 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: "Pie-in-the-sky do-gooders..."
http://www.autismwebsite.com/ari/about/aboutari.htm
Dr. Rimland's 1964 book, "Infantile Autism: The Syndrome and its Implications
for a Neural Theory of Behavior," was responsible for challenging and
changing the long-held belief that autism was an emotional disorder caused by poor
mothering. Autism is now recognized as a biomedical disorder. Rimland has
devoted himself tirelessly to conducting and disseminating the results of research
on methods of diagnosing and treating the full spectrum of autism. These
treatment modalities, once considered radical, are now gaining wide acceptance as
the news spreads about formerly autistic children who have been reclassified as
normal.
www.pbs.org/pov/pov2002/ refrigeratormothers/about_roundtable.html
Viewer Question: My Sister and I are functioning as our 48-year old "classic"
Autistic Brother's Caregivers, and I am in the process of becoming his Legal
Guardian.For many years, my Brother had a full and good life in first the
Children and then the Adult villages of the Camphill Movement, becoming a master
weaver. Unfortunately, six years ago, our Father died unexpectedly. This came
at a time when my Brother was experiencing many other unavoidable changes. All
this lead to a breakdown, and he is now in a neuro-psych facility receiving
neuro-behavioral and psycho-pharmacological treatments. It is our hope that he
will be stabilized, and will be able to return to a setting similar to the
Camphill Village.
I would be most interested to know any recommendations on facilities,
therapies, or treatment programs for older autistics as they seem to be virtually
non-existent.
Dr. Rimland: There is no question about it: there is an extreme shortage of
suitable residential facilities for adult autistic individuals. Pie-in-the-sky
do-gooders who were very well intentioned, but very poorly informed, did a
great disservice to mentally handicapped individuals of all kinds, including
autistic, retarded and schizophrenic individuals by closing down most the
institutions (the "asylums" - think what the word asylum really means) during the last
several decades. They thought they would improve things by moving the
handicapped persons into group homes in the so-called "community." As a result,
premature deaths and patient abuse have skyrocketed.
In my view, the very best choice for your brother is a place like Camphill,
or one of the very few excellent, moderately self-sufficient farm or ranch
communities, such as Bittersweet Farms in Ohio.
======================
Let's see, no puff pieces allowed...does this qualify as a puff piece
because it's positive about Camphill? Hmmm, well, Dr. Rimland is
world-re-knowned for his study of autism, he is a researcher, so
science is involved, so maybe it's ok not to post too much, just a
little so that I won't get cyber-screeched at.
There.
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 21:20:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linda Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
--- Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) wrote:
)
) DAN DUGAN:
) ) ) Regarding Altavista (Overture), Sune is
) incorrect. They accept our
) )) ads. We have the service turned off right now
) simply because we can't
) )) afford it.
)
) )LINDA CLEMENS:
) )According to Waldorf answers, altavista rejected
) PLANS ads. Altavista
) )will not accept overture ads which they've
) determine violate their own
) )ad policies.
)
) I repeat, WaldorfAnswers is incorrect on that point.
) It would enhance
) their credibility if they removed that false
) statement.
)
Though I'm sure Waldorfanswers isn't infallible,
they're credibility has stood up well. You originally
denied that PLANS had ever advertised. Perhaps it's
easy to forget buying advertising for at least a
couple of years, from at least two internet
advertising companies. And perhaps it's easy to
forget getting rejected from (just one?) of them, and
your "retaliation" by complaining against
waldorfanswers.
I poked around with internet searches and verified
that it wasn't at all infrequent that altavista would
reject overture ads due to certain conflicts with
their own advertising policies. I'm unconvinced that
this wasn't the case with PLANS as well, since so far,
waldorfanswers has demonstrated itself to be a more
reliable source of information on the question of
PLANS advertising. Perhaps altavista's rejection
slipped under your radar. I found other advertisers
on the internet complaining about making a similar
discovery themselves.
Linda
Linda
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 00:37:50 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: "The signs are good."
http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,1518248,00.html
Explainer: Steiner schools
How Steiner schools are run
Polly Curtis, education correspondent
Thursday June 30, 2005
[.................]
Is the government going to introduce state Steiner schools?
The signs are good. Today's report from the University of West of England
advocates introducing Steiner principles into state schools. Last month, the
government announced that it was funding a feasibility study to see whether a
Steiner school in Hereford could be state funded. The government is firmly
committed to giving parents more choice over how their children are educated and
there certainly seems an appetite for Steiner state schools. However, they would
have to bend the rules to allow Steiner schools to opt out of the national
curriculum, which is mandatory for all state schools. State school teachers are
hoping the report's recommendation that some of the principles of Steiner
schools should be adopted will include less emphasis on national testing at seven,
11 and 14, which is deeply unpopular. It also emerged today that the government
is to fund the introduction of Montessori-style school teaching at a
Manchester primary school.
[..............]
Oops, Barnaby -- I think you missed something...
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 01:04:52 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: "...happy to work endlessly..."
Gabriel wrote:
Discuss topics that are appropriate, of course (!), but I think a bit
of moderation from the critics' side is also appropriate.
Just my opinion.
Pete plunges on:
Moderation in what form? Reform of Waldorf requires hard, relentless
work. Reform has taken far too long as it is despite a movement for
reform from within Waldorf. I am happy to work endlessly toward a
Waldorf community that would either do what it says or say what it does.
If Waldorf says there is no Anthroposophy in the schools, then there
should be NO Anthroposophy in the schools. If they are going to have
Anthroposophy in the schools, then they should clearly say this so that
there is no mistake about it - and they need to let people know what
Anthroposophy is. There is no moderate position on this topic. Waldorf
is not entitled to lie to prospective (and current) parents about the
role of Anthroposophy and Steiner's teachings - regardless of the fact
that Steiner said it was OK to lie about these things. It is NOT OK for
Waldorf to do this under ANY circumstances and the only reason Waldorf
schools have for doing this is that Anthroposophy (their religion)
allows them to. If asking a school system to be accountable for what it
advertises and delivers is an extremist view, I'll happily wear that
label.
Pete
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It's true: Pete knows no moderation in his zeal to reform.
I admire his dedication and have a sneaking suspicion
that if the opportunity every arose he would love to be a
Waldorf teacher, if only to show them how to do it right.
Pete has, if you ignore one or the other of his peculiar
characteristics, many of the makings of a fine WE
teacher:
--incredible energy
--great initiative
--natural authority
--enthusiasm, can inspire
--loves kids & wants to see them thrive
--patience
--perseverence
--scientific/artistic capabilities
--likes to put together lesson plans (we saw the outline on
Open W. of his course on mechanics)
--fierce sense of justice & fairness
--understands the dynamics of a group
--good planner but knows when to let go and be
spontaneous
Not all of these are entirely in evidence on the WC list,
however.
I accuse him of a secret love for WE.
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 01:31:47 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: RE: "How To" Demonize Waldorf
Barnaby:
Froth away, Serena. Anyone can look back and see whether I was
'demonising' Waldorf education, or just responding to a particularly
silly post of yours. If I say 'tyre is to wheel as shoe is to foot', I"m
not saying that wheels walk.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Ah, Barnaby addresses me without vile language...how
pleasant!
So flesh out your analogy for us. Please.
David Koresh's cult is to ________________ as WE is to ______________
Or is it David Koresh's cult is to WE as ____________ is to _____________
Please enlighten us as to what you mean exactly.
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 02:17:07 EDT
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: "Steiner Schools in England" Report
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Education/documents/2005/06/30/Steiner.p
df
WC members should check out the "list of popular misconceptions"
in the Report.
I am truly astonished how in depth this report is and how much the
authors have actually understood.
This is a good example of how one can explain Steiner accurately
without needing to be an A.
Kudos to the authors of the Report!
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:42:26 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
Linda wrote:
) ) This tap dance is amusing, walden. There's a lot of
) ) fancy steppin', and you're kicking up a lot of dust up
) ) the floorboards. Hmmmmmm. What is it I said that you
) ) *sure* as hell don't want to talk about?
Walden asked:
) How am I supposed to know what that means? Dust and floorboards and a
) very odd question. What the...? Say what you mean and mean what you say.
Try it.
Linda replied:
"PLANS has set up a website which solicits and publishes articles
depicting WE as a racist, anti-semitic religious cult where children are
bullied, neglected and sexually abused. Of course there would be
complaints to those who accept advertising for it."
Glad your dusty dance is over. It's an adventure trying to chat with you!
Clearly, Linda, you and I do not see the PLANS website in the same light. I
think your description of the website and what it solicits is inaccurate,
misleading and disingenuous. And demonstrably false. The organization IS
critical of Waldorf. Period. YES - articles are welcome which are critical
of Waldorf/Anthro. It's called "waldorfcritics!"
And YES - there are *some* sad stories and testimonials. There are also some
fascinating articles by non-PLANS related people - some from other
countries, as well. What I find truly disturbing is your take on this
subject. Rather than think about the *reason* for, and material published at
the website, you seem to ignore the material at the site and invent this
nonsense about PLANS "soliciting" something the webmaster clearly does not
solicit. You have taken the time to post what *IS* solicited at the site
(above) and your fabrication is not there. It seems you are unable to find
anything to back up your claim. The webmaster/board of PLANS does not
solicit the material you claim.
The fact that there are problems in the Waldorf movement - from misleading
public relations to more serious incidents - seems to be lost on you,
perhaps because these problems have not happened at your school and while I
do not believe that serious problems occur on a regular basis at every
Waldorf school, I have no doubts about a systemic problem within the
movement.
When I first read about Sharon's family's ordeal with their Waldorf
school/Anthro doctor, I was horrified. When I heard about many other stories
from other Waldorf schools I felt very sad for those people. When I
experienced problems in our old school and finally pulled the plug when the
situation was unbearable, it was devastating to our family.
When I see you picking quotes and digging through the archives on a mission
to discredit PLANS and critics of Waldorf - and by extension, imo, those
families who have had a very painful ordeals with Waldorf/Anthro - I just
don't understand where you're coming from. If we
(anyone/everyone/pro/con/neutral) can help one hundred or a thousand or even
one more family(s) to make a good choice with regards to a school/community,
is it not worth the effort to do so?
**NOTE: And there will STILL be a great many families who find their
Waldorf school to be a good fit. I, for one, am happy for them. This is NOT
about closing Waldorf schools, dedicated teachers, etc. This IS about
helping people understand what they might be getting into.
Linda quoted the PLANS webmaster:
"Those of you with glowing testimonials are welcome to submit them to
the St John's University (SJU) Waldorf list, or to Sune's new site. We
are, after all, a Waldorf critics web site...
"Thanks!
...Gary Bonhiver
www.waldorfcritics.org Webmaster "
There you go, Linda. Imagine that - PLANS aiming people to other pro-Waldorf
sites/lists and reminding people that their (PLANS) site is critical of
Waldorf.
PLANS has not claimed (I think) to be objective, yet we find these links.
How many of those sites link to PLANS? Not many. Not that I'm surprised but
it is something to ponder.
Linda wrote:
)I'm going to sit right here and continue with what I was saying.
Have you ever entertained the concept of listening with the goal of
understanding?
-Walden
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:59:29 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: oh my, what on earth is going on here
Linda wrote:
)I'd say there's a whole lot of "discussing" on this board, but not much
happens in the way of "learning".
When one is willing to learn... learning happens. I was once a pro-Waldorf,
dedicated volunteer for years who began attending Steiner study groups and
reading the good Doctor every day. I monitored this list from a lofty place
and thought I felt pretty darn good about my lot in life. When I decided to
let myself become free and willing to "learn," I realized how much I had to
learn.
It was tough lesson... but worth the effort.
-Walden
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1808
-- Topica Digest --
RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By pkcompany netzero.net
Re: "Steiner Schools in England" Report
By nanetteblank hotmail.com
RE: "...happy to work endlessly..."
By pkcompany netzero.net
RE: "...happy to work endlessly..."
By diana.winters verizon.net
1 RE: Gnomes, Nature Spirits and The New Jerusalem
By diana.winters verizon.net
Southern Cross Review publishes PLANS Schwartz article
By dan dandugan.com
blogger's summary of Anthroposophical worldview
By dan dandugan.com
Re: About the latest on the lawsuit
By dan dandugan.com
ad hominem warning [RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the
Internet?]
By dan dandugan.com
RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By dan dandugan.com
Admin: suspension for ad hominems
By dan dandugan.com
RE: Admin: suspension for ad hominems
By g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se
Re: Admin: suspension for ad hominems
By motormouth punkAss.com
yet another interesting swedish website
By motormouth punkAss.com
question for the scandinavians on the list
By motormouth punkAss.com
Re: About the latest on the lawsuit
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
RE: Admin: suspension for ad hominems
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
RE: Admin: suspension for ad hominems
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
Re: Admin: suspension for ad hominems
By motormouth punkAss.com
RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By dan dandugan.com
Re: oh my, what on earth is going on here
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
RE: Admin: suspension for ad hominems
By pkcompany netzero.net
Re: Admin: suspension for ad hominems
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 14:36:06 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
)
) Serena- aol.com wrote:
)
) According to RS:
)
) 1. Does the unprogressed human have a body? Yes
)
) 2. Does the progressed person have a body? No
)
) 3. Do gnomes, sylphs, undines & salamanders have human
) bodies? No
)
) 4. Is therefore the unprogressed person with a human body
) a gnome? (or other old nature spirit like an undine, sylph,
) salamander) No
)
) 5. Is the progressed person without a body now a nature spirit
) or old nature spirit (gnome, undine, sylph, salamander)? No
)
) 6. Is therefore the unprogressed person, still with a human body,
) but left behind in development, is a NEW nature spirit with a
) physical form? Yes
)
) I believe these are true inasmuch as they reflect what RS says
) in the quote above. Which of these do you believe is false, Margaret?
)
)
)
)
)
) I'd like to answer that one - THEY'RE ALL FALSE. Where is the evidence
) that any of these things are anything but false - the imaginings of
) Steiner? Geez...
)
) Pete
)
)
) =================================
)
) Fudging the question, are you, Pete?
)
) It wasn't for you anyway. Besides, nothing here you could tie to a
) concentration camp, or brainwashing. How boring for you. But wait
) a sec -- *you* can tie *everything* to lies and brainwashing! How
) simple it all its.
)
) Next thing you'll be writing about rounding up "evil doers"...
)
) There's no evidence in your mind that RS said anything meaningful.
)
) However, there's no evidence that your potpouri of spiritual musings
) mean anything either. If you want to see it like that, of course.
)
) I'd like Margaret and Diana to take a shot at these questions. You
) won't because unless you want to be shown up as a transparent
) _ _ _ _, you have to agree that I got the substance of the matter
) correct (apologies to the finer souls among us -- you know why).
)
) Serena Blaue
)
) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
)
I've already made my point on this, Serena. But nice try...
Pete
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 10:58:20 -0400
From: "nanette blank" (nanetteblank hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: "Steiner Schools in England" Report
I haven't been able to read the full report yet in pdf format. The report
seemed to have some misunderstanding though. Look at these statements:
.. Montessori schools differ in that they do not follow a strict
curriculum, instead they give pupils total control over their education,
deciding the pace at which they learn and advocating learning through play.
-- One criticism of Montessori is that creative play is NOT encouraged. All
the children's activities are called "work" form constructing a puzzle to
writting in journals.
.. Steiner schools were successful in teaching foreign languages at an
early age, getting pupils enthusiastic about learning and involving them in
choosing what they wanted to learn about.
-- One criticism of Steiner schools is that children do not choose what they
learn about. The curriclulum and classroom are authoritarian.
The reporter probably made these errors, or the implementation could be
different in England. I have studied both but my experience is only in the
US, but there could be different cultural interruptations. Anyone know?
I do think it is interesting that the researcher advocates implementing
goverance principles from Steiner Schools into the state model. ( "We also
found that the emphasis given to the non-hierarchical, collegial form of
running schools, offers a contrast to current practice in the maintained
sector and may prove relevant for mainstream schools," he said. ) My
experience with the governing of the WS was not good, but neither was the
public school system. I did think that the public school responded better to
the more aggresous acts than the Steiner School. Unfortunately I have seen
both retain teachers that continue lame teaching.
BYTW. Serena, Thanks for changing your style of article posting.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Serena Blaue" (SerenaBlaue aol.com)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 2:17 AM
Subject: "Steiner Schools in England" Report
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a Free T-Mobile Sidekick II plus $500 towards service!
Click here.
http://click.topica.com/caadGKUb1dkiGbOBvpHa/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Education/documents/2005/06/30/Steiner.p
df
WC members should check out the "list of popular misconceptions"
in the Report.
I am truly astonished how in depth this report is and how much the
authors have actually understood.
This is a good example of how one can explain Steiner accurately
without needing to be an A.
Kudos to the authors of the Report!
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a Free Sirius Satellite Package, don't pass on this!
http://click.topica.com/caadGKVb1dkiGbOBvpHf/ProductTestPanel
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
New threads are always welcome.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 15:03:38 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: "...happy to work endlessly..."
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
)
)
) Gabriel wrote:
) Discuss topics that are appropriate, of course (!), but I think a bit
) of moderation from the critics' side is also appropriate.
) Just my opinion.
)
)
)
) Pete plunges on:
)
) Moderation in what form? Reform of Waldorf requires hard, relentless
) work. Reform has taken far too long as it is despite a movement for
) reform from within Waldorf. I am happy to work endlessly toward a
) Waldorf community that would either do what it says or say what it does.
)
) If Waldorf says there is no Anthroposophy in the schools, then there
) should be NO Anthroposophy in the schools. If they are going to have
) Anthroposophy in the schools, then they should clearly say this so that
) there is no mistake about it - and they need to let people know what
) Anthroposophy is. There is no moderate position on this topic. Waldorf
) is not entitled to lie to prospective (and current) parents about the
) role of Anthroposophy and Steiner's teachings - regardless of the fact
) that Steiner said it was OK to lie about these things. It is NOT OK for
) Waldorf to do this under ANY circumstances and the only reason Waldorf
) schools have for doing this is that Anthroposophy (their religion)
) allows them to. If asking a school system to be accountable for what it
) advertises and delivers is an extremist view, I'll happily wear that
) label.
)
) Pete
)
)
) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
)
) It's true: Pete knows no moderation in his zeal to reform.
)
) I admire his dedication and have a sneaking suspicion
) that if the opportunity every arose he would love to be a
) Waldorf teacher, if only to show them how to do it right.
)
) Pete has, if you ignore one or the other of his peculiar
) characteristics, many of the makings of a fine WE
) teacher:
)
) --incredible energy
) --great initiative
) --natural authority
) --enthusiasm, can inspire
) --loves kids & wants to see them thrive
) --patience
) --perseverence
) --scientific/artistic capabilities
) --likes to put together lesson plans (we saw the outline on
) Open W. of his course on mechanics)
) --fierce sense of justice & fairness
) --understands the dynamics of a group
) --good planner but knows when to let go and be
) spontaneous
)
) Not all of these are entirely in evidence on the WC list,
) however.
)
) I accuse him of a secret love for WE.
)
I've never hidden that there are things about Waldorf that I like.
Almost everyone here was attracted to Waldorf at some time or another by
things they liked as well. If Waldorf was honest about its actions and
intentions, it would make a fine school system for people who want
exactly that for their kids. So would Hogwarts. Unfortunately, Waldorf
is not honest. People involved in leading Waldorf are not honest, they
are deceptive. This is fundamental to Waldorf's problems and this
conspiritorial deception leads to abuse of power and borders on illegal
behavior. It certainly crosses the line for immoral behavior.
Reform is absolutely necessary for Waldorf to continue. Instead of
fighting people like me, Serena, particularly if you love Waldorf as
much as you say you do, you should join me in a call for accountability
and change in the Waldorf movement. Why not let Waldorf stand for
honesty instead of dishonesty? Why not let Waldorf stand for learning
instead of dumbing-down? Why not let Waldorf stand for individuality
and realization of human potential instead of conformity and
isolationism? Why not let Waldorf enroll less students but keep all of
them instead of having a huge turnover in student population? Why not
approach the few stubborn people within the Waldorf movement who through
their petty, deceptive, dishonest measures are keeping Waldorf from
reailzing its own potential instead of attacking the ones who ask that
Waldorf be better?
Why not?
Pete
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 11:26:36 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: "...happy to work endlessly..."
Great post, Pete.
(I'm popping in extremely briefly this morning)
I've found the best reply to this "You secretly love Waldorf" which DOF's
seem to fully believe is a poisoned arrow to sling at a critic, is to admit
it. Sure we all love Waldorf, or at least what it could have/should have
been. It's really not a secret.
My two cents, from what I know of him I agree Pete would probably be a great
teacher, Waldorf or otherwise.
Diana
Serena;
)I admire his dedication and have a sneaking suspicion that if the
)opportunity every arose he would love to be a Waldorf teacher, if only to
)show them how to do it right.
(snip long list of Pete's sterling qualities)
)I accuse him of a secret love for WE.
Pete:
)I've never hidden that there are things about Waldorf that I like.
)Almost everyone here was attracted to Waldorf at some time or another by
)things they liked as well. If Waldorf was honest about its actions and
)intentions, it would make a fine school system for people who want
)exactly that for their kids. So would Hogwarts. Unfortunately, Waldorf
)is not honest. People involved in leading Waldorf are not honest, they
)are deceptive. This is fundamental to Waldorf's problems and this
)conspiritorial deception leads to abuse of power and borders on illegal
)behavior. It certainly crosses the line for immoral behavior.
)Reform is absolutely necessary for Waldorf to continue. Instead of
)fighting people like me, Serena, particularly if you love Waldorf as
)much as you say you do, you should join me in a call for accountability
)and change in the Waldorf movement. Why not let Waldorf stand for
)honesty instead of dishonesty? Why not let Waldorf stand for learning
)instead of dumbing-down? Why not let Waldorf stand for individuality
)and realization of human potential instead of conformity and
)isolationism? Why not let Waldorf enroll less students but keep all of
)them instead of having a huge turnover in student population? Why not
)approach the few stubborn people within the Waldorf movement who through
)their petty, deceptive, dishonest measures are keeping Waldorf from
)reailzing its own potential instead of attacking the ones who ask that
)Waldorf be better?
)Why not?
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 12:36:42 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: 1 RE: Gnomes, Nature Spirits and The New Jerusalem
Linda -We've been over EVERY point below 14 times now so I believe I'll skip
the particulars on the gnomes. As for karma, I wrote and as I do not have
time for a longer discussion I will repeat:
"I am generally only interested in how religious notions are used by humans,
often to control or abuse others, and this one (karma) has a long, sorry,
dirty history."
. . . and I think if you were *really* interested in the substance of that
discussion, you'd see that it's a far cry from "Anyone who believes in karma
and the afterlife is nuts."
I assure you that these topics are genuinely extremely meaningful to me on a
personal level and I also assure you that there is no chance that you will
discourage me from speaking about them by imagining that you discredit or
embarrass me by reprinting them. I don't have time for a meatier karma
discussion today.
Diana
-----Original Message-----
From: L G Clemens [mailto:aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 1:01 AM
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Subject: RE: Gnomes, Nature Spirits and The New Jerusalem
--- Diana Winters (Diana.Winters verizon.net) wrote:
)
) Linda:
)
) )MM remarked
)
) MM? Who's MM?
Ask walden.
) your first order of business was to
) question all sorts of
) irrelevant things like whether I really said it,
) suggested I was lying about
) how LONG I talked to the reporter for, and anything
) else you could possibly
) use to cast a sweeping impression that possibly I'm
) simply a lying person.
Diana, either you were mistaken about how long you
talked to the reporter, or your hour long interview
gives us a good idea of how much she valued what she
told you, by throwing the whole thing in the dustbin.
The reporter used NONE of it, however long the
interview was.
) You even implied I might be lying that I had talked
) to this reporter *at
) all*. It was not exactly taking the high road, was
) it?
You invited the question. You were clueless that the
quotes she attributed to you weren't really even
yours. I wouldn't make that mistake!
If you can't remember what you told her, or when, can
you expect us to automatically believe you remember
talking to her at all?
) Finally you were able
) to calm down enough to *look* at the passage and
) discover triumphantly that
) I am uncertain on the theological point of how many
) angels can dance . . .
) whoops, I mean whether gnomes, thousands or millions
) of years from now, will
) have physical bodies . . .
)
)
Straw man argument alert.
) )to demonstrate why a school might discourage
) someone like you from talking
) )about Waldorf. The statement was, whad-I-call-it?
) A "goofy muck-up" or
) )somesuch?
)
) The statement was correct. Not one comma of it has
) been shown incorrect per
) Steiner.
It's 100% incorrect. Nothing you've quoted of Steiner
has validated your interpretation.
) )The explanation represented to the newspaper by the
) "spokesperson" to
) )explain gnomes in Waldorf schools is idiotic.
)
)
) The explanation represented to the newspaper was
) factual, per a Steiner
) passage that has been quoted and discussed here.
No. Steiner's passage you've quoted makes no mention
of gnomes.
) )Of course, Diana, you perhaps hold to the
) philosophy that anyone who
) )subscribes to a karmic philosophy of life and
) afterlife is nuts. Okay.
) )Fine.
)
)
) I don't believe, and have definitely never said
) anything to suggest to you
) you that I believe, that "anyone who subscribes to a
) karmic philosophy of
) life and afterlife is nuts." That's another one of
) your whoppers - a
) galaxy-sized misstatement that is unsubstantiable in
) anything I've said here
) or elsewhere. It is nothing but a huge deflection -
) so please don't waste
) your time dragging the bottom of the archive-pond
) for relevant Diana-posts -
) oh, hell, go ahead, it is always fun to see where
) your archaeology digs in
) the critics archives take you. It does bring up
) things I'd forgotten
) saying, but I'm getting a bang out of the process!
Okay. If you enjoy it as much as I do, here goes:
Diana-) "My take: Karma has never made much sense to
me. Anthroposophists will say this is because I am
"in my head," but frankly, if it makes no sense, what
use is it? It seems bluntly obvious to me that not
everything happens for a reason. I am generally only
interested in how religious notions are used by
humans, often to control or abuse others, and this one
(karma) has a long, sorry, dirty history."
I'm sorry if my "perhaps you believe this is all nuts"
mischaracterized your position. I'll allow that
"perhaps you believe this is all nuts" and "It makes
no sense, what use is it?" aren't exactly the same
thing.
) )Steiner did. You don't. But this remark went
) out-of-bounds because the
) )course taken wasn't, "I disagree. There is no
) Karma."
)
) Oh, good, another one!!
) It wouldn't have made sense for me to tell the
) reporter "There is no karma"
) since that isn't really my view on the subject.
Sorry. Let me fix this then. You didn't tell the
reporter, "It makes no sense. What use is it?"
) Perhaps you can find me in
) the archives saying there is no karma?
)
Diana, you're not being asked to defend whether or not
you believe in karma. You're being asked to defend
your misattribution unto Steiner that, because of
karma, humans can reincarnate into gnomes! This claim
is not found or suggested *anywhere* in the lecture
you've used as evidence of this statement. Quite the
contrary.
Linda
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 11:16:13 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Cc: fts southerncrossreview.org
Subject: Southern Cross Review publishes PLANS Schwartz article
I've just browsed the current copy of Frank Thomas Smith's
Anthroposophical web-zine "Southern Cross Review."
http://SouthernCrossReview.org
I was surprised to find a reprint of Eugene Schwartz's 1999 Sunbridge
College talk "Waldorf Education: For our times or against them,"
lifted directly from the PLANS web site!
No permission was requested, but it's ok with me. It would have been
nice to credit the source, though! I wonder if he asked Schwartz.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 11:54:13 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: blogger's summary of Anthroposophical worldview
See this summary:
http://stevebishop.blogspot.com/2005/06/botton-and-anthroposophical-worldview.html
"Channel 4 this evening showed a programme called 'The strangest
village in Britiain' as part of 'Only Human'. It was the story of
Botton a village of handicapped people run along Rudolf Steiner's
anthroposophical philosophy. At one point in the documentary it
suggested that Steiner's perspective was Christian. It is anything
but. I dug up some old notes of mine about the anthroposophical
worldview and have posted them here. My interest in Steiner stems
from the time I stayed at a Camphill community for a weekend to see
my youngest brother who was living there get married (he was a
co-worker, not a villager)."
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 12:15:44 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: About the latest on the lawsuit
Linda, you wrote,
)Waldorfanswers has a copy of a press release regarding the latest
)development in the case.
)
)According to this press release, PLANS has been denied 11 of its
)witnesses and 101 pieces of evidence because of failure to make timely
)disclosure to the defendant.
It's the lawyers' job to attempt to include as much evidence as they
can throw in, and it's the judge's job to winnow it down.
)It also states that PLANS has *no* expert witnesses lined up?
We have plenty of good evidence without the expense of experts...of
whom there are practically none who are qualified and can be called
objective on this subject. Also the federal court is very picky about
who is an expert--they have to have a degree in the subject they're
testifying on. That's why I was rejected as an expert, for example.
)It seems PLANS is already off to a wobbly start.
)
)http://www.waldorfanswers.org/CourtOrder20April2005PressInfo.html
)
)Any comment?
The case is seven and a half years old, it's hardly at the start!
First Amendment cases can take fifteen years to resolution at the
Supreme Court, so I'd say it's probably half-way. We've had our
standing affirmed with two trips to the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals; that's not wobbly.
The trial is scheduled to begin September 12, 2005, in the federal
courthouse in Sacramento, California, and to run for sixteen
weekdays. We're very happy to get to the point of actually litigating
the core issues, rather than the technicalities we've been dealing
with for seven years.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 12:26:07 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: ad hominem warning [RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the
Internet?]
Serena Blaue, you wrote,
)It wasn't for you anyway. Besides, nothing here you could tie to a
)concentration camp, or brainwashing. How boring for you. But wait
)a sec -- *you* can tie *everything* to lies and brainwashing! How
)simple it all its.
)
)Next thing you'll be writing about rounding up "evil doers"...
)
)There's no evidence in your mind that RS said anything meaningful.
)
)However, there's no evidence that your potpouri of spiritual musings
)mean anything either. If you want to see it like that, of course.
)
)I'd like Margaret and Diana to take a shot at these questions. You
)won't because unless you want to be shown up as a transparent
)_ _ _ _, you have to agree that I got the substance of the matter
)correct (apologies to the finer souls among us -- you know why).
This is a series of conjectures and insults directed to another
subscriber. Please limit your posts to discussion of the issues, not
the personalities of your fellow discussants. You were warned about
an ad hominem on June 22; this is your second warning.
-Dan Dugan
Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 12:44:46 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
) ) DAN DUGAN:
)) ) ) Regarding Altavista (Overture), Sune is
)) incorrect. They accept our
)) )) ads. We have the service turned off right now
)) simply because we can't
)) )) afford it.
))
)) )LINDA CLEMENS:
)) )According to Waldorf answers, altavista rejected
)) PLANS ads. Altavista
)) )will not accept overture ads which they've
)) determine violate their own
)) )ad policies.
))
)) I repeat, WaldorfAnswers is incorrect on that point.
)) It would enhance
)) their credibility if they removed that false
)) statement.
))
)
)Though I'm sure Waldorfanswers isn't infallible,
)they're credibility has stood up well.
I like it, actually. When you dig beyond the front pages, it starts
reading like a wacky fanatical flame.
)You originally
)denied that PLANS had ever advertised.
When you said advertising, I thought print. I forgot the search
engines, and corrected myself when you pointed that out.
)Perhaps it's
)easy to forget buying advertising for at least a
)couple of years, from at least two internet
)advertising companies.
Google was only for a couple of weeks. We were on Altavista for a
couple of years.
)And perhaps it's easy to
)forget getting rejected from (just one?) of them, and
)your "retaliation" by complaining against
)waldorfanswers.
I think it's egregiously unfair for Google to reject us for
denigrating another organization, and then to allow WaldorfAnswers to
advertise when they do the same to us. Google is a private company,
and they can do as they please with their advertising. All their
AdWords editors' communications with us back then were anonymous,
which seemed like a very strange way to conduct business!
)I poked around with internet searches and verified
)that it wasn't at all infrequent that altavista would
)reject overture ads due to certain conflicts with
)their own advertising policies.
I'm pleased that PLANS passed their muster.
)I'm unconvinced that
)this wasn't the case with PLANS as well, since so far,
)waldorfanswers has demonstrated itself to be a more
)reliable source of information on the question of
)PLANS advertising. Perhaps altavista's rejection
)slipped under your radar. I found other advertisers
)on the internet complaining about making a similar
)discovery themselves.
It's just mean-spirited for you to keep trying to call me a liar. I
checked the account periodically and reviewed the activity
statistics. Altavista only provided about ten percent of our site
sessions. I don't know what proportion of the total sessions are from
automated engines, however; I suspect that that proportion is large.
We host about 800 visitors a day on our web site, human and robot.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 12:49:56 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Admin: suspension for ad hominems
Serena, you wrote,
)It's true: Pete knows no moderation in his zeal to reform.
)
)I admire his dedication and have a sneaking suspicion
)that if the opportunity every arose he would love to be a
)Waldorf teacher, if only to show them how to do it right.
)
)Pete has, if you ignore one or the other of his peculiar
)characteristics
...
Serena, I am suspending your subscription to this list because you
have continued to make personal comments. You may re=subscribe after
a week if you think you can follow our simple rules of staying
on-topic and avoiding ad hominem arguments.
This is your second suspension. If there is a third you will be
permanently banned.
-Dan Dugan
Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 20:56:21 +0000
From: Why Not (g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se)
Subject: RE: Admin: suspension for ad hominems
Dan,
Wow. Earlier I thought I was simply misreading a bias here but now it is
clear. Dan Dugan you shall not use your bully pulpit in this manner. A
judicial decision needs to be based in objectivity yet I have marked
that every complaint you have made in the last three months has been
directed in one direction. Your dismissal is unwarranted and unethical.
Gabriel
Dan Dugan wrote:
)
) Serena, you wrote,
)
) )It's true: Pete knows no moderation in his zeal to reform.
) )
) )I admire his dedication and have a sneaking suspicion
) )that if the opportunity every arose he would love to be a
) )Waldorf teacher, if only to show them how to do it right.
) )
) )Pete has, if you ignore one or the other of his peculiar
) )characteristics
) ...
)
) Serena, I am suspending your subscription to this list because you
) have continued to make personal comments. You may re=subscribe after
) a week if you think you can follow our simple rules of staying
) on-topic and avoiding ad hominem arguments.
)
) This is your second suspension. If there is a third you will be
) permanently banned.
)
) -Dan Dugan
) Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 18:00:53 -0400
From: motormama (motormouth punkAss.com)
Subject: Re: Admin: suspension for ad hominems
On Jul 1, 2005, at 4:56 PM, Why Not wrote:
) . A
) judicial decision needs to be based in objectivity yet I have marked
) that every complaint you have made in the last three months has been
) directed in one direction. Your dismissal is unwarranted and unethical.
)
) Gabriel
not true.
i got my first warning just a couple of days ago : )
(for attacking serena!)
the dismissal was overdue in my humble and respectful opinion.
happy independence day everybody!!!!
oh, and Sune and Gabriel - i have a splendid article for you in
swedish:
http://www.physto.se/~vetfolk/Folkvett/20044antroposofi.html
this article will soon be translated and hopefully added to PLANS'
list of links : ))
m rosso
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 18:13:07 -0400
From: motormama (motormouth punkAss.com)
Subject: yet another interesting swedish website
http://www.prm.se/antroposofi/walped.htm
)
) http://www.physto.se/~vetfolk/Folkvett/20044antroposofi.html
)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 18:20:44 -0400
From: motormama (motormouth punkAss.com)
Subject: question for the scandinavians on the list
I am trying to find a book called "Jag trodde på Waldorfskolan" (I
believed in the Waldorf School) by Gösta Wilson.
if there is anybody out there who has a copy or knows how/where to find
it - please let me know!
M Rosso
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 15:22:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linda Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: About the latest on the lawsuit
--- Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) wrote:
)
) Linda, you wrote,
)
) )Waldorfanswers has a copy of a press release
) regarding the latest
) )development in the case.
) )
) )According to this press release, PLANS has been
) denied 11 of its
) )witnesses and 101 pieces of evidence because of
) failure to make timely
) )disclosure to the defendant.
)
) It's the lawyers' job to attempt to include as much
) evidence as they
) can throw in, and it's the judge's job to winnow it
) down.
)
That's a distorted account of the issue I spoke of,
but at least it's a funny one.
PLANS' lawyer waited until after the "last chance"
deadline had passed (almost a year earlier) before
submitting these witnesses and exhibits to the
defendants or the court.
The judge didn't exclude them because there was too
much, or because it's his job as a judge to "winnow
it". There are much more important reasons why the
judge would expect his court orders and deadlines be
respected. The defendants are entitled, through
discovery, to have availability to the plaintiff's
witnesses before trial, and to familiarize themselves
with the exhibits which will be presented at trial.
In our legal system, they are entitled to understand
the accusations which will be brought against them,
and they are to given time to prepare and *defend*
themselves competently. Last minute switcheroos with
witnesses and exhibits would force the judge to choose
to either a) postpone the trial to give the defendants
the opportunity to for discovery, or b) ignore the
defendant's rights under law, and forge ahead even
though the defendant hasn't had time to prepare the
defense.
In at least one of the court documents submitted by
the defense, the defense attorney's complained of the
plaintiff (PLANS) "continued disregard of Court orders
and instructions", including a failure to pay monetary
sanctions imposed for failing to cooperate with
earlier defense discovery requests.
) )It also states that PLANS has *no* expert witnesses
) lined up?
)
) We have plenty of good evidence without the expense
) of experts...of
) whom there are practically none who are qualified
) and can be called
) objective on this subject.
Ah. Could this mean you couldn't find experts who
agreed with you? Does an expert have to agree with
you before they can be considered "objective"?
) Also the federal court is
) very picky about
) who is an expert--they have to have a degree in the
) subject they're
) testifying on. That's why I was rejected as an
) expert, for example.
)
Would you consider yourself otherwise qualified? For
example, would you consider yourself "objective"? If
not, I would have thought that would have disqualified
you as well, since PLANS was restricting itself to
only those potential expert witnesses who it
considered "objective".
) )It seems PLANS is already off to a wobbly start.
) )
)
)http://www.waldorfanswers.org/CourtOrder20April2005PressInfo.html
) )
) )Any comment?
)
) The case is seven and a half years old, it's hardly
) at the start!
) First Amendment cases can take fifteen years to
) resolution at the
) Supreme Court, so I'd say it's probably half-way.
) We've had our
) standing affirmed with two trips to the Ninth
) Circuit Court of
) Appeals; that's not wobbly.
)
) The trial is scheduled to begin September 12, 2005,
) in the federal
) courthouse in Sacramento, California, and to run for
) sixteen
) weekdays. We're very happy to get to the point of
) actually litigating
) the core issues, rather than the technicalities
) we've been dealing
) with for seven years.
)
It should be quite a show, and I take it you expect it
to run for another 7 or 8 years?????????????
Linda
PS-Moby Dick? Moby DICK!? Is this show supposed to
be a comedy?
____________________________________________________
Yahoo! Sports
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 16:06:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linda Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
--- Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) wrote:
) )You originally
) )denied that PLANS had ever advertised.
)
) When you said advertising, I thought print. I forgot
) the search
) engines, and corrected myself when you pointed that
) out.
Just to get this straightened out:
You went first. You announced that PLANS has never
advertised.
Serena then asked you twice about the Overture Ads,
and how they were paid for. You didn't answer how
they were paid, and I'm curious about that myself. On
your appeal for donations on the PLANS webpage, you
represent that donations would go toward the court
costs. How were the ads paid for?
) )I poked around with internet searches and verified
) )that it wasn't at all infrequent that altavista
) would
) )reject overture ads due to certain conflicts with
) )their own advertising policies.
)
) I'm pleased that PLANS passed their muster.
There seems to be a discrepancy on that.
)
) )I'm unconvinced that
) )this wasn't the case with PLANS as well, since so
) far,
) )waldorfanswers has demonstrated itself to be a more
) )reliable source of information on the question of
) )PLANS advertising. Perhaps altavista's rejection
) )slipped under your radar. I found other
) advertisers
) )on the internet complaining about making a similar
) )discovery themselves.
)
) It's just mean-spirited for you to keep trying to
) call me a liar.
I didn't call you a liar. As far as claiming I'm
supposedly being "mean spirited", that's an ad hominem
remark, which is against the rules here, except I
guess when you do it.
) checked the account periodically and reviewed the
) activity
) statistics. Altavista only provided about ten
) percent of our site
) sessions. I don't know what proportion of the total
) sessions are from
) automated engines, however; I suspect that that
) proportion is large.
As I said, other overture advertisers discovered only
by looking for them specifically that altavista had
banned their ads. Since they didn't enter a contract
with altavista, they were out of the loop, and
altavista didn't notify them. The notices given were
between altavista and overture. I also have the
impression that all these companies are usually very
hush hush about the decision making that goes into
what they will accept or not.
Linda
____________________________________________________
Yahoo! Sports
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 16:54:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linda Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Admin: suspension for ad hominems
--- Why Not (g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se) wrote:
)) Dan,
)
) Wow. Earlier I thought I was simply misreading a
) bias here but now it is
) clear. Dan Dugan you shall not use your bully pulpit
) in this manner. A
) judicial decision needs to be based in objectivity
) yet I have marked
) that every complaint you have made in the last three
) months has been
) directed in one direction. Your dismissal is
) unwarranted and unethical.
)
) Gabriel
)
)
)
) Dan Dugan wrote:
) )
) ) Serena, you wrote,
) )
) ) )It's true: Pete knows no moderation in his zeal
) to reform.
) ) )
) ) )I admire his dedication and have a sneaking
) suspicion
) ) )that if the opportunity every arose he would love
) to be a
) ) )Waldorf teacher, if only to show them how to do
) it right.
) ) )
) ) )Pete has, if you ignore one or the other of his
) peculiar
) ) )characteristics
) ) ...
) )
) ) Serena, I am suspending your subscription to this
) list because you
) ) have continued to make personal comments. You may
) re=subscribe after
) ) a week if you think you can follow our simple
) rules of staying
) ) on-topic and avoiding ad hominem arguments.
) )
) ) This is your second suspension. If there is a
) third you will be
) ) permanently banned.
) )
) ) -Dan Dugan
) ) Moderator
)
) Your free subscription is supported by today's
) sponsor:
)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
) Erase wrinkles without Botox! Nexiderm SP is
) clinically proven to
) reduce wrinkles by 68% Click here to get your 30-day
) free supply.
)
http://click.topica.com/caadHllb1dkiGbNQ9ROf/Nexiderm
)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
)
)
==^================================================================
) You can ask any question about Waldorf you like
) here, no matter how basic. New threads are always
) welcome.
)
)
)
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 17:03:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linda Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Admin: suspension for ad hominems
--- Why Not (g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se) wrote:
)) Dan,
)
) Wow. Earlier I thought I was simply misreading a
) bias here but now it is
) clear.
It's clear, all right.
It's too bad you didn't see the flimsy excuses used to
boot Sune Nordwall from waldorfanswers. You'd know
you weren't misreading anything. You'd wouldn't have
been left to wonder how the rules really work around
here.
Linda
____________________________________________________
Yahoo! Sports
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 21:02:08 -0400
From: motormama (motormouth punkAss.com)
Subject: Re: Admin: suspension for ad hominems
But Sune still subscribes to the list *vinkar glatt* - and when he
wants to get involved in the discussions, he does.
and do you mean that Sune was completely innocent and was booted off
just because he is an anthroposophist and doesn't agree with Dan?
somehow i doubt it.
m rosso
On Jul 1, 2005, at 8:03 PM, L G Clemens wrote:
)
) It's clear, all right.
)
) It's too bad you didn't see the flimsy excuses used to
) boot Sune Nordwall from waldorfanswers. You'd know
) you weren't misreading anything. You'd wouldn't have
) been left to wonder how the rules really work around
) here.
)
) Linda
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 16:24:42 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
Linda, you seem to be grasping at straws here:
)Serena then asked you twice about the Overture Ads,
)and how they were paid for. You didn't answer how
)they were paid, and I'm curious about that myself. On
)your appeal for donations on the PLANS webpage, you
)represent that donations would go toward the court
)costs.
And can you tell me the date when that appeal appeared?
)How were the ads paid for?
Overture takes their monthly accumulated charges automatically from
PLANS' debit card. Do you have a problem with that?
)...As I said, other overture advertisers discovered only
)by looking for them specifically that altavista had
)banned their ads. Since they didn't enter a contract
)with altavista, they were out of the loop, and
)altavista didn't notify them. The notices given were
)between altavista and overture.
Um, I say again, I monitored the traffic monthly. Seems like there
wouldn't be clicks and charges if the ads were banned!
)I also have the
)impression that all these companies are usually very
)hush hush about the decision making that goes into
)what they will accept or not.
I was able to get a written policy out of Google, but the editors
seem to have a lot of latitude on how they apply it.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 19:31:50 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: oh my, what on earth is going on here
Hi Gabriel,
I am interested in what you wrote here...
You wrote:
)I have been trying to get a fix on the purpose of this list for three
)months now. Apparently there are two factions here fighting each other,
)like politics.
Public debate is interesting and seems to attract many different people for
as many reasons. This list, in terms of open, democratic debate is much
better than the other heavily censored pro-Waldorf-only *no debate allowed*
list.
You wrote:
)The republicans call the democrats extremists and vice
)versa.
I disagree if your analogy is about Waldorf Critics and Waldorf Supporters.
While I would say there are *some* extreme views, there are also moderate
views. For example, we often find Critics writing about the good things in
Waldorf. Hardly "extreme" and not what one often sees in political debates.
)Anthroposophy is a huge subject and a life calling for some of us.
Does this mean you agree with all or most of what Steiner wrote and spoke
about - including all of his thoughts about children and Waldorf education?
You wrote:
)We are university trained and live in the real world as well as work
)with waldorf in a more private sphere.
As well as...? Do you see a distinction between the "real world" and waldorf
in the private sphere?
You wrote:
)We are well aware of the hate that the accepted university models have for
anthroposophy and anything related to anthroposophy.
I don't understand this sentence. How does a university model have hate for
anthroposophy? Do you have examples?
You wrote:
)Anyways my school faculty has been interested in the spirit of this WC
)list and it has fallen upon me to give them my opinion of the benefit
)this group has, what insights the participants have and if our school
)can use them to be stronger and deeper.
Does this mean that your faculty asked you to check out the Waldorf Critics
list?
You wrote:
)My opinion is my own but I share your shock at the level of manipulation
and shock discussion that goes
)on in this group.
One of the most shocking posts recently was yours, Gabriel. During a
discussion where I was trying to communicate with another list member, here
is what you added to the "spirit of this WC list:"
Gabriel previously wrote: "Linda that is EXACTLY what I thought about
Waldens little expose as well. Thank you for spotlighting that BS. Well
done!"
I have no idea what you mean with that rude sentence about me, Gabriel.
Would you be so kind as to elaborate?
You wrote:
)Winning intellectual points appears to be the point of
)this list- she is self perpetuating and has a life of her own, living
)off the energy trapped in the list.
Who is the "she" that is self perpetuating and what is the energy you see as
trapped in the list?
Thanks for your consideration of these questions.
-Walden
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 02:36:46 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Admin: suspension for ad hominems
I thought it was a little harsh too - especially since Serena went to
some effort to point out my good qualities (G). I, for one, hope she
comes back after her time in the penalty box.
Pete
Linda Clemens wrote:
)
)
)
) --- Why Not (g.pulgar kommunicera.umea.se) wrote:
)
) )) Dan,
) )
) ) Wow. Earlier I thought I was simply misreading a
) ) bias here but now it is
) ) clear.
)
) It's clear, all right.
)
) It's too bad you didn't see the flimsy excuses used to
) boot Sune Nordwall from waldorfanswers. You'd know
) you weren't misreading anything. You'd wouldn't have
) been left to wonder how the rules really work around
) here.
)
) Linda
)
)
)
)
) ____________________________________________________
) Yahoo! Sports
) Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football
) http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 00:54:52 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: Admin: suspension for ad hominems
Gabriel wrote:
) ) Wow. Earlier I thought I was simply misreading a bias here but now it is
clear.
With regards to the actual rules of the list, I don't know that there is a
bias. The moderator seems to be (technically) following the rules we all
agree to when joining the list. Personally, I would rather not see Serena
chopped for what I see as a relatively minor infraction(s) but I am not the
moderator. Such is life and I hope she re-subs.
Linda wrote:
) It's clear, all right.
)
) It's too bad you didn't see the flimsy excuses used to
) boot Sune Nordwall from waldorfanswers.
I thought that website belonged to Sune - did he boot himself from his own
site??! (g) I think I know what Linda is trying to say - it might not have
come out right, huh? In any case, the fellow need only re-sub here unless
there are other issues unbeknownst to mere list members. It might help
everyone for him to join the discussion instead of taking strange
mean-spirited potshots at PLANS and critics of his chosen cause. Labeling
PLANS a hate group is just so very misguided and weird, although more than
one non-PLANS person has told me it only confirms cultish behaviour. I
would encourage people to discuss their problems or concerns with whoever
seems to be involved in those concerns.
There really is no need for ad hominems. And yes, yours truly has had a
warning or two in the past. I am not beyond apologizing when there is a
need.
-Walden
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1809
-- Topica Digest --
RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By diana.winters verizon.net
RE: Nature spirits...
By diana.winters verizon.net
RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By diana.winters verizon.net
Did anthroposophists invent composting?
By diana.winters verizon.net
RE: "How To" Demonize Waldorf
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
RE: "The signs are good."
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
RE: Did anthroposophists invent composting?
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 08:52:55 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
Serena:
Serena wrote:
)The careless part of what Diana said was to give the reporter the
)impression that A's think people would incarnate into these gnomes, with
)the implication that they resemble the little figures that abound in WE
)classrooms.
I think you have this backwards - it's not that I screwed up by referencing
"gnomes" in relation to the scenario Steiner paints of "unprogressed" humans
furnishing future material for nature spirits. Even today the gnomes
probably aren't *really* supposed to be the cute little guys with the long
white beards we all picture when we hear the word "gnome." The gnomes
Waldorf kids draw, play with, and hear stories about are depicted this way
because they are known this way from from our popular folklore and culture
(not to mention suburban lawn ornaments) the same way that Jesus and God
appear on Sunday school classroom walls or children's Bibles, sitting on
clouds or wearing long robes and carving laws into stone tablets . . . It
isn't theology, it's popular representation.
Nature lore from Steiner IS the reason the gnomes "abound" in Waldorf. Are
you going to tell me with a straight face that it's not? It's absurd to
think I misled the reporter by explaining a little bit of what is actually
behind the gnomes in the Waldorf classroom. Waldorf puts anthroposophical
theology into images that will appeal to children.
Okay, Serena, you wanted an answer to your little numbered list below
"According to RS." Tell me which of the points are *contradictory* to what I
told the reporter. The unprogressed human has a body. Did I tell the
reporter the unprogressed human DOESN'T have a body? Etc. Apply this to each
of your points, please.
Do you think the reporter gave a sh** about whether the gnomes really have
bodies or will on Jupiter, or whether "unprogressed" humans will?
"The Unprogressed" . . . it sounds like a horror movie.
)According to RS:
)1. Does the unprogressed human have a body? Yes
)2. Does the progressed person have a body? No
)3. Do gnomes, sylphs, undines & salamanders have human
)bodies? No
)4. Is therefore the unprogressed person with a human body
)a gnome? (or other old nature spirit like an undine, sylph,
)salamander) No
)5. Is the progressed person without a body now a nature spirit
)or old nature spirit (gnome, undine, sylph, salamander)? No
)6. Is therefore the unprogressed person, still with a human body,
)but left behind in development, is a NEW nature spirit with a
)physical form? Yes
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 09:13:24 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Nature spirits...
Linda:
)*Furnish* is a weird term for this.
(referring to humans furnishing new nature spirits in a future era, as the
quote from Steiner unambiguously says) -
"Furnish" is Steiner's term, or the translator's, not mine. It's an
ambiguous word leaving open just *how* they furnish them, which is why we
can fuss over whether or not the "new nature spirits" will have bodies. Just
*what* is being furnished, and by what process, and in what form, is for
anthroposophists to wrangle over; after a person "furnishes" whatever it is
they furnish, do they have something left over, or does it all go into the
furnishing? In other words, who's left with a body and who isn't? Do some
people sort of split in two, or discard unneeded spiritual debris like a
rocket heading into space, and give some of this substance into the
"furnishing" of whatever it is nature spirits need furnished for them, while
still keeping some for themselves? If you "furnish" a spiritual substance of
some sort that provides a "form" or body for a nature spirit, is there
anything left of you? I don't know. It is anthroposophical
angels-on-a-pinhead stuff and doesn't relate to the comment given to the
reporter.
)"Unprogressed" people, he says, will eventually lose the opportunity
)to progress. That condition, that "fixedness", is what he terms 'nature
)spirit'.
As you're so fond of saying, ?????????? :)
See below. You're arguing two things that take you in two directions.
)It's pure conjecture on your part that Steiner claimed in this lecture that
)gnomes evolve at all.
Yes, it is, but it was Serena who said that originally, not me. (I merely
mused that she might be correct, but you've forgotten that now and think it
will make a nice target to swing at since in your confusion you think it's
*my* argument.) *You two* have been arguing that the nature spirits of the
future won't be the same as the nature spirits of today. *That* was the
reason it was supposed to be wrong for me to be referring to them as
"gnomes." (That, and the fact that there are also salamanders etc.) So if I
acquiesced to this, it was to concede these minor points. (And it could have
been not that lecture but some other one where he speaks more on the future
of the gnomes, couldn't it? I was allowing the possibility.)
If the gnomes *don't* evolve then there's absolutely no question they're
still "gnomes." If they do, then it's possible, as I've long since agreed,
that "gnomes" is not really the correct term, or won't be at that time.
Since Steiner doesn't provide another name for these nature spirits of a
future era (or, possibly he did? but it doesn't have a correlate in
English?) it's reasonable to go on using the name they're currently known
by, not only in Waldorf schools but in popular culture. It's a good term to
use because the general public has some notion what these creatures are
supposed to be.
The gnomes' subhuman nature, their
one-step-behind-humans-and-kind-of-pissed-off-about-it position is
generally, at least vaguely, understood, and it will not change, if I am
reading Steiner right, and THAT is the point of the passage and the point I
basically made to the reporter.
Spiritual devolution, for those who don't get with the anthroposophical
program. Okay.
Do you get that, Linda? Do you get that the only reason anyone cares about
this argument is Steiner's notion that humans can in some way fall behind
and become something literally subhuman, appearing even in a different
physical form to differentiate them from regular humans? This notion is
being discussed over on A_T as we speak: the notion that in the future, it
will be possible to tell humans apart by spirituality the way we can now
tell them apart (sometimes) by race.
This notion is really pretty creepy to some of us. It does not speak of
brotherhood, high ideals of humanity etc. -Waldorf/anthroposophy's public
face - but of something really very much lesser and not admirable, that
Waldorf is definitely hiding.
I wrote previously:
)Humans, in this future era, will no longer have the bodies and forms that
)we today recognize as human. Yes? (It is rumored we will get new
)"members.") Still, Steiner (and anthroposophists) continue to refer to
)these quite-different future humans as "humans." I would guess, then, that
)"gnomes" will go on being "gnomes" in Steiner lore even when they, too, get
)new and improved forms, and don't look like little old men with beady eyes
)and long beards and leathery skin anymore. (Oh, it was just one more little
)thing Linda and Serena were splitting hairs with me over . . . they weren't
)to be "gnomes" then, they were to be referred to as "new nature spirits."
)Therefore, Diana had given the reporter "wacky misinformation" . . .)
Linda replied:
)Since you didn't really give the reporter this information, there is no
)"therefore".
LOL, well you will have to pardon me if I forget which of you accuses me of
giving her "wacky misinformation" and which of you accuses me of never
having talked to her in the first place . . .
)All I can say is this, Diana. In one of my first attempts to explain your
)mistake, I described an analogy to Darwinian evolution. Human beings who
)don't evolve, stay the same. They don't automatically "rewind the tape" to
)an earlier evolution.
Steiner said the human race will furnish these new nature spirits in the
Jupiter era. Just how Steiner meant that this will happen, and future
evolutions of not only gnomic physiognomy but also taxonomy and nomenclature
are for anthroposopists to debate, not me.
My final take on this: if the reporter used the juiciest and silliest little
quote she could find, you should probably just be grateful. The humor
actually deflects from stuff that is much ickier-stickier. She made fun of
the gnomes because (as Serena has pointed out here) humor displaces
uncomfortable feelings sometimes. The gnomes in Waldorf are not cute and
sweet when you look beneath the surface, they're basically a threat.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 09:20:22 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
Linda:
)Walden just doesn't like the way it sounds, and has insisted that I "back
)it up".
No, he asked you to back up the claim that PLANS "solicits articles claiming
that Waldorf Schools are 'racist, anti-semitic religious cults where
children are bullied, neglected and sexually abused.'"
)I've already "backed it up" several times, but he refuses to admit it. I
)appreciate that you stepped in to give it a go this time.
I'm afraid you can't use my little piece musing on the gnomes to back up the
above claim, as it makes no such allegation.
)Another "lady"? "Lady", you should remember that next time you overreact
)and complain, "Are you calling me a liar?",
Somehow, "lady" doesn't strike me as badly as "liar."
Let's be clear: you have insinuated many times that I am a liar. On this
occasion you have hoped to make people question whether I really ever talked
to this reporter *at all* - that I may have fabricated the entire thing. On
A_T at one point, you implied to your audience that I might have fabricated
our entire experience in Waldorf - that we may never have been at a Waldorf
school at all!
When you are asked if you really believe I am lying, you back off mumbling
maybe I just have a poor memory, but your intention is clear.
)and insist you didn't say something that you completely forgot saying.
Just because I "completely forgot" (go figure! four years later) that I said
something in particular doesn't mean I'm now going to be embarrassed or
ashamed about it.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 09:31:42 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: Did anthroposophists invent composting?
A recent flyer entitled "Anthroposophy at Work" published by the
Anthroposophical Society in America states that "Biodynamic agriculture
pioneered the scientific use of crop rotation, composting, and natural pest
control to help heal the earth as well as to prouce uniquely nutritious
food."
They are actually taking credit for *composting* here.
This is a photo caption; in a lengthier passage on biodynamic agriculture,
the wording is more careful: "This approach builds upon established methods
of sustainable agriculture - compost, manures, soils and plants are treated
with specially fermented herbal preparations . . . " It looks like someone
editing photo captions got a little carried away.
Diana
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 14:17:30 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: "How To" Demonize Waldorf
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) So flesh out your analogy for us. Please.
)
) David Koresh's cult is to ________________ as WE is to ______________
You've missed the point, again. I was talking about the cult-like
behaviour of an officer of one Waldorf school, as reported by Maria
(motormama): you took a single sentence out of context and used it to
deny that Waldorf insitutuions are cult-like. My analogy made the
stupidity of your argument obvious.
Rather than find a better way to argue that it is not a cult-like
behaviour to tell parent volunteers to go and find the children who are
destined to be pupils at their school, you engage in more cult-like
behaviour, misrepresenting what I said rather than responding to what I
said. Carry on: it's entertaining, and makes Waldorf critics' lives
easier if you make our points for us.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 14:58:43 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: "The signs are good."
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,1518248,00.html
) Explainer: Steiner schools
)
) How Steiner schools are run
)
) Polly Curtis, education correspondent
) Thursday June 30, 2005
) [.................]
) Is the government going to introduce state Steiner schools?
)
) The signs are good. Today's report from the University of West of
) England advocates introducing Steiner principles into state schools.
The report simply doesn't say that, which I guess is why you haven't
quoted the relevant parts of the report itself. This is what the authors
say:
) There are a number of aspects of Steiner school practice that
) might readily inform good practice in maintained schools, whilst
) others might be more controversial but could be the basis for
) profitable dialogue. (p. 8)
I doubt anybody here would disagree with that. It's rather different
from advocating that state schools adopt Steinerian principles. They're
talking about *practice*, not principles, and their examples do not
include any of the looneytunes stuff about clairvoyance, reincarnation,
eurhythmy, 'humours' or gnomes.
Elsewhere in the report the authors note that:
) There are evident commonalities, as well as differences, between
) Steiner and mainstream education. Woods et al. (1997) draw attention
) to two aspects of mainstream education which resonate with Steiner
) education. The first is the "strong theme in British education
) emphasising the importance of teaching the whole child and the role
) of the school in personal and social development" (op. cit.: 33).
) The second is the recognition within mainstream education of the
) importance of self-reflection by teachers.
British state education developed in this way without reference to
Steiner. If there are practices in Waldorf education which mainstream
teachers decide are worthwile, they will be able to practice them
similarly without reference to Steiner.
From the Guardian article:
) State school teachers are hoping the report's recommendation
) that some of the principles of Steiner schools should be adopted
) will include less emphasis on national testing at seven, 11 and 14,
) which is deeply unpopular.
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) Oops, Barnaby -- I think you missed something...
I don't think so: the teachers (and most parents and pupils) want less
testing. I doubt they arrived at that position by reading Steiner.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 15:20:29 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Did anthroposophists invent composting?
Diana Winters wrote:
) ...in a lengthier passage on biodynamic agriculture, the wording is
) more careful: "This approach builds upon established methods of
) sustainable agriculture - compost, manures, soils and plants are
) treated with specially fermented herbal preparations . . . " It looks
) like someone editing photo captions got a little carried away.
But regained their composure in time to avoid letting slip anything
about 'cosmic forces' being harnessed by fermenting particular plants
inside a cow's peritoneum or a deer's bladder and diluting the resulting
mess thousands of times while stirring it in the correct way. People
just wouldn't understand about Doktor Rudi's amazing clairvoyance.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 09:18:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linda Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
--- Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) wrote:
) )Serena then asked you twice about the Overture Ads,
) )and how they were paid for. You didn't answer how
) )they were paid, and I'm curious about that myself.
) On
) )your appeal for donations on the PLANS webpage, you
) )represent that donations would go toward the court
) )costs.
)
) And can you tell me the date when that appeal
) appeared?
)
I assume around March, April when the court date was
announced, because you reference this date.
) )How were the ads paid for?
)
) Overture takes their monthly accumulated charges
) automatically from
) PLANS' debit card. Do you have a problem with that?
No. I asked where the money came from to pay for
them. Do you have a problem with that?
I do have a problem with the delinquency in payment on
the court fines imposed, as I do with wasting school
districts' resources by forcing them to file so many
nonsense motions, simply in order to get the plaintiff
(PLANS) to behave and follow court orders.
Linda
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 11:58:12 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
LINDA CLEMENS:
) ) )Serena then asked you twice about the Overture Ads,
)) )and how they were paid for. You didn't answer how
)) )they were paid, and I'm curious about that myself.
)) On
)) )your appeal for donations on the PLANS webpage, you
)) )represent that donations would go toward the court
) ) )costs.
DAN DUGAN:
) ) And can you tell me the date when that appeal
) ) appeared?
)LINDA CLEMENS:
)I assume around March, April when the court date was
)announced, because you reference this date.
The reason I asked was because you seemed to be on a mean fishing
expedition trying to find -something, anything- you could call
improper in PLANS' conduct.
) ) )How were the ads paid for?
))
)) Overture takes their monthly accumulated charges
)) automatically from
)) PLANS' debit card. Do you have a problem with that?
)
)No. I asked where the money came from to pay for
)them. Do you have a problem with that?
Every cent we have came from individual donations.
)I do have a problem with the delinquency in payment on
)the court fines imposed, as I do with wasting school
)districts' resources by forcing them to file so many
)nonsense motions, simply in order to get the plaintiff
)(PLANS) to behave and follow court orders.
Games lawyers play (both sides). The substantial part is coming soon!
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1810
-- Topica Digest --
RE: "Steiner Schools in England" Report
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
Re: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 14:42:25 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: "Steiner Schools in England" Report
Links to the report on the British government's education dept website.
Digest (364 Kb):
http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RB645.pdf
Full report (1 Mb):
http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR645.pdf
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 23:33:16 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: Redux: "Free" advertising on the Internet?
Diana wrote:
)Even today the gnomes
)probably aren't *really* supposed to be the cute little guys with the long
)white beards we all picture when we hear the word "gnome." The gnomes
)Waldorf kids draw, play with, and hear stories about are depicted this way
)because they are known this way from our popular folklore and culture
)(not to mention suburban lawn ornaments) the same way that Jesus and God
)appear on Sunday school classroom walls or children's Bibles, sitting on
)clouds or wearing long robes and carving laws into stone tablets . . . It
)isn't theology, it's popular representation.
)Nature lore from Steiner IS the reason the gnomes "abound" in Waldorf. Are
)you going to tell me with a straight face that it's not? It's absurd to
)think I misled the reporter by explaining a little bit of what is actually
)behind the gnomes in the Waldorf classroom. Waldorf puts anthroposophical
)theology into images that will appeal to children.
This is the type of explanation parents need to help them understand the
reasons for what happens in a Waldorf school. Of course Diana did not
mislead a reporter and the discussion and doubting of who said what for how
long is, imo, a silly deflection. I think the above passage is helpful
(especially the last sentence) for two reasons:
1) It would seem to be accurate
2) It is not judgmental
If any anthroposophically inclined list members do not agree with Diana's
take on *gnomes in Waldorf* (above), perhaps they would like to add a
comment?
This is also the type of thing a revamped Waldorf FAQ should include. IMO.
-Walden
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1811
-- Topica Digest --
Blue eyes Blond hair
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 00:21:12 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Blue eyes Blond hair
So I try again to wear an objective hat and find myself browsing the
waldorfanswers website. I read this particular piece twice and must admit I
find the infamous Steiner "blue-eyes-blond-hair" quote (with lots of
editorializing) even more disturbing than on it's own. If this is supposed
to show *context,* I'll plead guilty to not understanding how this helps
Steiner seem less controversial with regards to human beings, cleverness,
blue eyes and blond hair.
And the PLANS = "hate group" coupled with claims of "demagoguery"... is just
plain weird. IMO.
http://www.waldorfanswers.org/RSOnPerishingBlonds.html
Does anyone feel better about the Steiner quote after reading this article?
-Walden
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1812
-- Topica Digest --
RE: Blue eyes Blond hair
By pkcompany netzero.net
additions to web site
By dan dandugan.com
what slips by thanks to the "nutritional supplements" law
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 14:31:04 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Blue eyes Blond hair
Walden,
This quote has always been disturbing to me - and Sune's "answers" are
even more disturbing. The passage and the context clearly confirms that
Steiner DID imagine differences in intellect based on eye color and hair
color (and it isn't a huge leap to extend this to skin color when one
reads his other writings) and that these differences are spiritual in
nature and produced by a spiritual force that, oddly enough, nobody but
Steiner could identify. That Steiner, according to Sune and in the
context of the passages themselves, was in suggesting man could
"overcome" these intellectual differences (by becoming Anthroposophists)
is confirmation that he (Steiner) believed these differences in
intellect exist in blond people. It reminds me of when Dottie dropped
by to explain that Steiner wasn't a racist because he claimed that black
people could "overcome" their blood.
Whew...
Pete
walden wrote:
)
) So I try again to wear an objective hat and find myself browsing the
) waldorfanswers website. I read this particular piece twice and must
) admit I
) find the infamous Steiner "blue-eyes-blond-hair" quote (with lots of
) editorializing) even more disturbing than on it's own. If this is
) supposed
) to show *context,* I'll plead guilty to not understanding how this helps
) Steiner seem less controversial with regards to human beings,
) cleverness,
) blue eyes and blond hair.
)
) And the PLANS = "hate group" coupled with claims of "demagoguery"... is
) just
) plain weird. IMO.
)
) http://www.waldorfanswers.org/RSOnPerishingBlonds.html
)
) Does anyone feel better about the Steiner quote after reading this
) article?
)
) -Walden
)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 17:47:06 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: additions to web site
Additions made 7/3/05:
Added a link to "Karma and Reincarnation for Teachers,"
http://www.taruna.ac.nz/index.php?pid=28
added the article "Poor Academic Standards"
http://www.waldorfcritics.org/active/articles/Teacher_MQ.html
and "What They're Saying About Us,"
http://www.waldorfcritics.org/index.html#whattheysay
I found the photo of Samson Beaver that Toos Jurissen had in her
original article, and added it to "Waldorf Salad" (scroll down 2/3).
http://www.waldorfcritics.org/active/articles/waldorf_salad.html
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 21:48:58 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: what slips by thanks to the "nutritional supplements" law
Here's the full text of an ad in the newsletter of "True Botanica" in
Delafield, WI, an Anthroposophical initiative:
***
Hypericum Forte Cream
The most concentrated, standardized St. John's Wort cream on the
market! We tell you how much of the active substances of this
wonderful herb you are actually receiving. There is so much St.
John's Wort in the jar that in addition to the effects you see on the
skin, you can feel internal effects as though you had taken a capsule
by mouth.
Try it:
* For eczemas, and all skin inflammations
* For wound healing
* Massage it into inflamed or painful joints
* To lighten your mood
* Improve your thinking ability!
* Lower anxiety
(Remember that this is not a drug. It works to increase your inner
ability to help yourself)
***
They're actually promoting it as psychoactive, but saying it's not a
drug! Anthroposophy = institutionalized ignorance.
-Dan Dugan
BBC News, Wednesday, 1 March, 2000, 12:12 GMT
St John's Wort warning
St John's Wort may cause medical problems
Women using the contraceptive pill and patients on HIV, depression
and migraine treatments have been advised to stop using St John's
Wort.
The herbal remedy, used to treat mild depression, has been found to
interfere with some prescription medicines, triggering the new
guidance from the government.
Other patients should see their doctor for advice about stopping as
doing so will affect concentration of medicines in their bodies.
These include people using warfarin and digoxin for blood clots,
cylcosporin after heart transplants, and theophylline for severe
asthma and chronic bronchitis.
The advice, from the Medicines Control Agency (MCA), follows a
report into the herbal remedy, thought to be used by around two
million people in the UK, by the independent Committee on Safety of
Medicines (CSM).
Studies published in the Lancet and the British Medical Journal have
shown that St John's Wort speeds up the break down of medicines in
the body, leading to lower levels of the drug in blood. It can also
interfere with brain chemicals.
Use of the remedy by the public is estimated to be increasing at a
rate of 2000% each year.
Doctors report problems
Doctors in the UK have reported 14 cases of interactions, under the
"yellow card" reporting scheme for adverse drug reactions, which was
extende